Bathroom downlights in Zones 1/2

[ferrijt]

Hi,

I wish to install tilt downlighters in my bathroom in Zone 1 and 2. Articles I have read are not clear. In some cases it states that they must be ipx4 rated. In other cases it states that non ip rated lights may be used provided they are SELV with the transformer located outside Zone 2.
Also my ceiling is 2.35m from the floor does this take me out of zone issues?
I would appreciate if someone with 17th ed expertise would clarify the situation.

Advice much appreciated.

Jim

 

[ericmark]

(i) the finished floor level and the horizontal plane corresponding to the highest fixed shower head or water outlet or the horizontal plane lying 2.25 m above the finished floor level, whichever is higher

(ii) barriers or enclosures complying with Regulation 415.2 and affording a degree of protection of at least IPXXB or IP2X.

And that is for SELV if it does not say suitable for use in a bathroom on the packet then don't use it.

For low voltage (230vac) (ii) In zones 1 and 2: IPX4.

 

[Taylortwocities]

You are only considering the electrical aspects of installing downlights.
You have also to consider other Building Regulations. In this case you should also pay particular attention to

Part C: Moisture protection

For several reasons the amount of moisture that can enter a cold roof void must be controlled; thus anything which punctures the seal between the cold roof area and dwelling area must be considered.
Downlight fittings are intrusions into the roof area that can facilitate the passage of moisture.

BS5250 - which is referenced in Part C - stipulates the permitted air flow per luminaire (0.06m3/Hr/m2 at a pressure of 2 pascals) for which Part L defines the testing criteria and total building envelope
performance. The requirements are very demanding and care is needed to ensure compliance.

You need to chose downlights have been designed with special seals to inhibit the flow of air & moisture through the fitting as required by Part C of the building regulations.

You'll need to ask the maker if their adjustable downlights comply.

 

[ferrijt]

ericmark, taylortwocities,

Thank yo both for your comments.

I am now looking at some ip65 fire rated, tilt downlighters, few about, from lighting inovations on ebay, which along with an rcbo on the lighting circuit should, I believe meet the electrical regs. just need to check they meet taylortwocities comments.

Note that I will be getting a Part P registered person to actually do the electrical work. Just trying to get appropriate kit in advance.

Kind regards

Jim

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I wish to install tilt downlighters in my bathroom in Zone 1 and 2.

How many & what wattage?

How big is the bathroom?

Also my ceiling is 2.35m from the floor does this take me out of zone issues?

//www.diynot.com/wiki/electrics:bathroom-zones

 

[ferrijt]

hi ban-all-sheds,

I was thinking of 3 x 50w or 4 x 35w, mains or low voltage, with my bathroom size of 1.7m x 2.5m x 2.35m high.

Kind regards

 

[GaryMo]

Mains is Low Voltage (230v).
You're probably thinking of Extra Low Voltage luminaires (12v).

Have you considered CFL's (compact fluorescent lamps)?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I was thinking of 3 x 50w or 4 x 35w, mains or low voltage, with my bathroom size of 1.7m x 2.5m x 2.35m high.

Doesn't 150W of lighting in a room as small as that strike you as excessive?

 

[ferrijt]

Hi ban-all-sheds,

I have knocked my bathroom and toilet into 1 room any you may be right that 150w is too much. I will experiment with my existing lights, not at both ends of the room before buying.

I would like to have the lighting dispersed, eg one over the bath, one over the sink, one over the toilet and maybe one more. I am assuming that dowlighters can use bulbs of a lower voltage than supplied so I can drop to 20/25W.

Kind regards

 

[LiamPope]

Ah - you must be new here. You obviously dont know BAS yet and have mistaken his last post as well-meaning advice! I'll admit that his first post contained some of that, but by the second he's already into his usual anti-downlight onslaught.

Determining your room size, then asking if 150W doesn't sound excessive was not a helpful suggestion that you might want to consider less watts, it was just preparation for making statements containing some or all of: 'downlights are not designed for, and are completely incapable of providing room illumination, you are an idiot for considering such an 'engineringly offensive' (his own term) lighting solution, you must not fit them, what makes you think you are competent enough to do this work anyway, go away'.

There is some sound basis for his point of view, mind you. 150W would be excessive for a tradtional incandescent bulb, but will likely not be enough if you use halogen downlights. I have a similar sized bathroom that has 5 50W halogen downlights and the light is about right. The reason is little spotlights really are inefficient at lighting a room because they have such narrow beams, so you need more of them. BAS doesn't accept that there are other reasons, be it aesthetics or whatever, that people might want to use downlights even if they aren't the most efficient form of lighting.

Personally I wouldn't consider them in any larger room, but they are fine in my bathroom. I have mitigated the high energy consumption by swapping the 50W halogen lamps for some excellent 4W LED lamps with a 120 degree beam angle. The light is very slightly dimmer overall, but still very bright and much more diffuse and uniform than the halogens. So I achieve excellent quality lighting in my bathroom with only 20W using downlights. Job's a goodun and it's what the Mrs wanted.

So good luck with your downlights

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ah - you must be new here. You obviously dont know BAS yet and have mistaken his last post as well-meaning advice! I'll admit that his first post contained some of that, but by the second he's already into his usual anti-downlight onslaught.

Quite right too.

Determining your room size, then asking if 150W doesn't sound excessive was not a helpful suggestion that you might want to consider less watts, it was just preparation for making statements containing some or all of: 'downlights are not designed for, and are completely incapable of providing room illumination,

They aren't, as you go on to prove beyond any doubt whatsoever.

you are an idiot for considering such an 'engineringly offensive' (his own term) lighting solution,

They are so offensive, but should you call the OP an idiot?

There is some sound basis for his point of view, mind you.

Of course there is.

150W would be excessive for a tradtional incandescent bulb, but will likely not be enough if you use halogen downlights.

Which proves that what I say is absolutely correct.

I have a similar sized bathroom that has 5 50W halogen downlights and the light is about right.

Which proves that what I say is absolutely correct.

The reason is little spotlights really are inefficient at lighting a room because they have such narrow beams, so you need more of them.

Which is what I have always said, and which is why it us utterly wrong to use them for lighting a room

BAS doesn't accept that there are other reasons, be it aesthetics or whatever, that people might want to use downlights even if they aren't the most efficient form of lighting.

I don't care what people think they want.

Misusing lighting like that is completely wrong, and I will never stop saying so.

Aesthetics be damned - choosing form over function to the extent that the function you end up with is crippled and inefficient is not acceptable under any circumstances.

Personally I wouldn't consider them in any larger room, but they are fine in my bathroom.

No they are not, because you need too many of them.

I have mitigated the high energy consumption by swapping the 50W halogen lamps for some excellent 4W LED lamps with a 120 degree beam angle. The light is very slightly dimmer overall, but still very bright and much more diffuse and uniform than the halogens. So I achieve excellent quality lighting in my bathroom with only 20W using downlights.

And if you used LED luminaires designed to provide room illumination, how many watts would you need?

 

[LiamPope]

Lol. I had a bet with myself I'd get you writing a reply exactly like that. Thankyou.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Sad to see that the population of childish trolls and other forum parasites is not declining.

Well done on writing something that was not motivated by a desire to make a genuine case in which you believed.

I'm sure you think you're very clever, but you couldn't be more wrong about that if you tried.

 

[LiamPope]

Now now, no need to resort to personal attacks because your actual argument is so weak. I'm hardly a parasite or a troll, thank you very much.

Have a look at this BAS...

Untitled

• LiamPope
• 11 Mar 2010
• 2

It's my (unfinished) bathroom lit entirely by those 5 downlights. No other sources of light when I took the photo. Looks perfectly... illuminated to me! Apart from those daker areas at the top, the walls are uniformly and well lit, as is the floor - no bright spots and areas of darkness. In fact I might even say I like the darker areas at the top - they draw eyes away from those dead areas and into the room. Whoever said the goal of room illumination was to achieve a uniform light over every square mm of surface anyway? With the 120 degree LED lamps in, those shadows are much higher up the wall and more difuse - hardly noticable. The overall qualty of illumination is even better than with the halogens.

So perhaps you can see the problem myself and many others have with your ridiculous statements like: 'crippled and inefficient function', 'not acceptable under any circumstances', 'utterly wrong to use them to light a room', 'not designed to illuminate a room', 'they are offensive' etc etc etc ad nauseum. The fact is they are laughable statements - laughably incorrect. You seem to pride yourself on accurate knowledge, but these statements couldn't be further from reality as experienced by many people who have installed downlights. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, wrong though it may be, but when you rant and rant on every related thread, often resorting to unpleasant personal insults, it's tiresome to say the least. The only person coming accross as a childish troll is yourself, which is a shame, as otherwise you are one of the most valuable assets to this forum.

Liam

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Now now, no need to resort to personal attacks because your actual argument is so weak. I'm hardly a parasite or a troll, thank you very much.

I had a bet with myself I'd get you writing a reply exactly like that.

I stand by what I said.

It's my (unfinished) bathroom lit entirely by those 5 downlights. No other sources of light when I took the photo. Looks perfectly... illuminated to me!

It is extremely imperfectly lit because the design is so inefficient.

Whoever said the goal of room illumination was to achieve a uniform light over every square mm of surface anyway?

Nobody.

But that does not make deliberate inefficiency an acceptable design principle.

So perhaps you can see the problem myself and many others have with your ridiculous statements like: 'crippled and inefficient function', 'not acceptable under any circumstances', 'utterly wrong to use them to light a room', 'not designed to illuminate a room', 'they are offensive' etc etc etc ad nauseum. The fact is they are laughable statements - laughably incorrect.

No - they are absolutely correct.

Choosing an inefficient way to achieve your lighting goal is unacceptable. It is offensive.

You seem to pride yourself on accurate knowledge, but these statements couldn't be further from reality as experienced by many people who have installed downlights.

The reality which you, an adherent, report is a room approximately 5m² needing 250W of halogen lighting.

The reality which you, an adherent, report is that small recessed lights do not efficiently light the room.

Deliberately choosing a solution which is inefficient is, from an engineering point of view, offensive and wrong.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, wrong though it may be, but when you rant and rant on every related thread,

You only view it as ranting because you disagree with it.

often resorting to unpleasant personal insults,

"Often"??

it's tiresome to say the least.

I find it just as tiresome to see people promoting an inefficient design as something to be admired.

The only person coming accross as a childish troll is yourself,

Remind me who it was who wrote a reply thinking that it would "get" someone?

Oh yes - it was you, wasn't it.